Chema Nieto Castañón May 22, 2018:

I fully agree. Thanks for sharing such a thorough and interesting analysis!

Charles Davis May 22, 2018:

(3) So “associated with Alfonso” is itself ambiguous. Then again, I think it is quite possible that “alfonsí” could be used as a purely chronological term (from the time of Alfonso), as “isabelino” is, for example. Ideally one would want to ask the author what he meant by it, but this is probably not an option. So I think there is a strong argument in favour of using “Alfonsine” in English and avoiding the issue.

Charles Davis May 22, 2018:

(2) This is not addressed in the article, but I am sure that the author must expect it to be in the reader’s mind.

My comment on the meaning of alfonsí was based on the normal meaning of the word and on the abstract of the article, which I had read. As quite often happens, in my experience, the English version of the abstract is somewhat different from the Spanish. The latter refers to “dos imágenes marianas del siglo XIII”, but the English expands this to “two images of Our Lady, both dating from the 13th century and both closely linked to the person of Alfonso X the Wise and to the city of El Puerto de Santa María”.

So the question is really whether this gloss on “alfonsí” in the English abstract represents what the author means by the term. You would have thought it must, but I wouldn’t guarantee it; authors don’t always pay close attention to how their abstracts are translated. Sometimes they don’t even write the abstract themselves. These images are associated with Alfonso, in the sense that people associate them with him, though not necessarily in the sense that they are connected with him as a matter of historical fact.

(Continued in next post)

Charles Davis May 22, 2018:

@Chema I must admit that I hadn't read the article when I made my comment. Now that I have done so, I agree that the author is not saying that these statues are connected with Alfonso X personally, but only that they are of the right date. The idea of a personal connection arises because of the group of the Cantigas de Santa Maria, produced in Alfonso's court, known as the Cancionero de Santa Maria del Puerto, particularly CSM 328, on the building of the votive sanctuary by Alfonso on the site of mosque in the Castillo de San Marcos. It is traditionally supposed that the image known today as Nuestra Señora de los Milagros is the actual image venerated by Alfonso, as Manuel González Jiménez says:

"La repoblación del Puerto de Santa María es fruto del cariño que Alfónso X profesaba a esta ciudad, en la que había levantado una iglesia dedicada al culto de una de sus imágenes predilectas: la de Santa María del Puerto, a la que cantó en una preciosa serie de cantigas, la imagen milagrosa que hoy, por ello y con otro nombre, los portuenses llaman Nuestra Señora de los Milagros."
http://www.sonusantiqva.org/i/P/EPaniaguaCantigas/2000SMPuer...

(Continued in next post)

Chema Nieto Castañón May 21, 2018:

@Charles It happens the same with "imagen", which could also refer to a pictorical representation -which seems not to be the case here.

As for your interesting comment in answers, there is no reason to suspect a personal involvement of Alfonso X here -as there is with the Alphonsine tables.
The original context states "Ejemplar dedicado a: X SEMANA DE ESTUDIOS ALFONSÍES : Religión y sociedad en tiempos de Alfonso X : culto y devoción marianos".
And the text does not include any note relating these images to Alfonso X other than the acceptance of the reasonable possibility that those images correspond to the times of Alfonso's occupation of the rural area of Jerez and particularly Alcanate.
https://www.google.es/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://i...

Of course, there is also a mythical historiography -but I don't think it is so relevant here.
Anyhow, this being said, I don't see no problem with your proposed translation as Alfonsine images of the Virgin Mary, which relates to the original with just the same degree of understandable ambiguity.

Charles Davis May 21, 2018:

They would be both, but it's a good question: "imagen" often means specifically a statue, and these are in fact statues. But it also means any representation of a divine or sacred person: a representation that is an object of devotion. And "image" in English has been used historically the same way, as in the biblical expression "graven images", meaning statues (idols), carved images. So in this case I think "image" is a suitable translation.

broca (asker) May 21, 2018:

Would they be images, or statues?